| OCR Text |
Show 70 the United Notions and war, though he was in favor :()f intematioftcl behavior the morality He further must be accepted on Q this Q$ a possible substitute for putting war, neutrality, intemation.ollow, and moral basis and b.ed upon the recognized orgcmiZQtion theory not of en a legal purely statutory pian., "yet ond the existef¥:,G of international law orderly processes. ,t 11 .. J hove heard mefl argue that there never could be internationel law, because there ts nE> law above the law Qr th. sovereign state I the reel lQW giver. Do not Senators think there 1.$ such a thing 0$ a com munity of nqtions in this world today, lust os there is Q community of people? Do they not believe that they t moke hlW, whether the,y ecnsc lowl y <do it er not? osk, why is the conduct of men different from that of nations? The <mswer, I belreve, is to be found in Pflift in the differenee between pol itical moral ity and Indivi dual morality. It hQ$ been $cdd that 'political morality differs from individual morality, beec"te there is no t In ether words men In their rela power obeve the stete. tionships with each other operate under law. States. very often do not do so. If I go into the midst of the great American desert where there is no sign of government os far as I can see, Of if I 90 outside of the :3 mile I bYlit on the ocean, am I free to do what • WGnt to do? Is there no law in either place? Of course, there .s law. Man found long ogo thet in order to survive he hod to rognl%e his community of interest with other men. He regulated his relationships with other men by law. Today, as never before the $vrvival of man depends on Q recogni tion by stotes of the community of in'terest Qmong themselves if this International community under law is to be democratic $nd not totGllitadon, it must grow on order# not anything I ie ••• • • • chaos; 11 !l1.iS., • on freedorn, not repression; Vol. SO, p. 3022 , (74th 12'bld., p , • • 3023. on prosperity, Congress, not poverty. 12 2,d Sess., March 2, ! 936). |
